The vicious circle of religion.

Is the evagelical movement in Usa a threat to science?

  • Total voters
    17
aaqucnaona said:
Its all about religion. Superstitions build up, become institutional. Thats how religions develop.
Click to expand...

You are talking about institutes. Anyone, with enough money and know how, can create a ''religious institute''. If that is what you are talking about then fair enough, but I'm talking about religion itself, God, and our relationship with God.

What say you on that?

jan.
 
Aqueous Id said:
Making things up? You've never read any ancient history?


citing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrifice
Click to expand...


Every single animal that is purposefully killed is an act of sacrifice, and the worst acts of sacrifice occurrs in abundance, today, in the slaughterhouses.
Worst, because these animals are sacrificed purely for the pleasure of the individual. This is (I don't give a shit about anything but me and mine) atheism.

At least, in a religious sacrifice, there need not be damage to the environment, doing all kinds of nasty shit to make the animal grow fatter, faster, rampant obesity, disease, cruelty, not only to animals but people who may be regarded as animals or sub-human.


jan.
 
Jan Ardena said:
You are talking about institutes. Anyone, with enough money and know how, can create a ''religious institute''. If that is what you are talking about then fair enough, but I'm talking about religion itself, God, and our relationship with God.

What say you on that?

jan.
Click to expand...

Ok. I think:
Religion is a human construct, based around an idea called god, those would clear the religion and are empowered by it use this idea to control people. It was once necessary to explain the stars and the eclipses and to control uneducated, primitive, barbaric people. Now with education and science, both of those needs are fulfilled without religion. Thats why I think that soon it will be quite unnecessary. {of course were conditions arent stil quite, em, civilised or sofisticated, we do need religion for now}.

Whats Ur opinion?
 
wynn said:
Oh dear.
So do tell - who will collect or pay out your bet, in 500 years?
Click to expand...

Come on! It was figurative. Look at how religious the world was 500 years ago and how much less so it is today. Its bound to fade away in the future.
 
aaqucnaona said:
Ok. I think:
Religion is a human construct, based around an idea called god, those would clear the religion and are empowered by it use this idea to control people. It was once necessary to explain the stars and the eclipses and to control uneducated, primitive, barbaric people. Now with education and science, both of those needs are fulfilled without religion. Thats why I think that soon it will be quite unnecessary. {of course were conditions arent stil quite, em, civilised or sofisticated, we do need religion for now}.

Whats Ur opinion?
Click to expand...

My opinion is this. You are not thinking for yourself. You can go on any
fundie-atheist site and read the same rhetoric you have just spewed.

Have you read any vedic literature? If you have then you'll know that for thousands of years knowledge of the stars, planets, and universe have been known. There is nothing new, save minute details.

Have you read a book called ''Forbidden Archeology''? If you have, you will
realise that there is evidence of modern anotimical humans existing previous to 100,000 years stated by Darwinists/evolutionists.

There is an abundance of tools, and human remains dating back to millions of years, all of which have been suppressed, and/or denied by the powers that control.

Kinock yourself out.

jan.
 
Jan Ardena said:
My opinion is this. You are not thinking for yourself. You can go on any
fundie-atheist site and read the same rhetoric you have just spewed.
I swear, hon, I have not read even 1 such site, these thoughts are entirely my own, based on hitchen's naturalistic explaination of religion.

And indeed, Homo sapiens [no us, homo sapiens sapiens] are modern humans and they have been around for over a million years. We all know that. Homo sapiens neandethalis is even older than us.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
aaqucnaona said:
Come on! It was figurative.
Click to expand...

"Figurative," eh?

What else is "figurative"? Your critical thinking skills? :p


Look at how religious the world was 500 years ago and how much less so it is today. Its bound to fade away in the future.
Click to expand...

I have no recollection of how things were 500 years ago, so I can't say.
 
Last edited:
aaqucnaona,

Jan Ardena said:
My opinion is this. You are not thinking for yourself. You can go on any
fundie-atheist site and read the same rhetoric you have just spewed.


I swear, hon, I have not read even 1 such site, these thoughts are entirely my own, based on hitchen's naturalistic explaination of religion.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Wa' thank-ya sweet-buns, ferr showin me tha exteyant to which this indoctrination has spread.

Hitchins? :D:D:D


And indeed, Homo sapiens [no us, homo sapiens sapiens] are modern humans and they have been around for over a million years. We all know that. Homo sapiens neandethalis is even older than us.
Click to expand...


I'm talking about humans like us.
Read the book before you go making up your mind.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Math, at times, is not too much different from religion, in that it uses alternate reality to help explain reality.

For example, if I had three apples and took away four apples I would have minus one apple. What is a negative apple? I think it grows in the land of unicorns in alternate reality. This negative apple is a possible math result, such as from 3-4=-1, but the result in terms of reality, is not something of this world. Yet, this shadow world, where negative apples live, has practical value, allowing humans to create things in this world that are not yet part of nature. Nature does not have this shadow world and therefore cannot make synthetic things.

Religion works the same way, where that which is not evident or part of this world (negative apple), can be used as an alternator reality placeholder to help create new things that are not part of nature, such as evolving human nature.

The observational purist, to be consistent, should be up at arms against negative apples and irrational numbers, etc. But there is a dual standard because the entire political game is irrational, being part of that mirror world.

If you consider atheism, the question I have asked myself is why does religion push their buttons so much? Why do they get so irrational over something they say has no value.The reaction far outweighs the value they define. It would be like saying that little dog is a wimp, and then jump up and down in terror shaking a large stick. There is a loss of rational proportion.

This has to do with the math world and it own version of negative reality. If you take away an apple so there is a negative apple, there is a void inside the natural mind (where there are no negative apple), creating substance in alternate reality. The unconscious reaction is based on that void in reality or the substance this is created in their alternate reality. Live and let live does not create negative apples in the mind and is more calming since it return the unconscious to natural where there are only positive apples.
 
wellwisher,

Religion works the same way, where that which is not evident or part of this world (negative apple), can be used as an alternator reality placeholder to help create new things that are not part of nature, such as evolving human nature.
Click to expand...



Real religion is evident, IMO, but like any ''real'' experience, it is not theoretical. IOW, you can't sample it, you have to experience it. It is an individual pursuit.



If you consider atheism, the question I have asked myself is why does religion push their buttons so much? Why do they get so irrational over something they say has no value.
Click to expand...


Because it becomes part of our nature if we let it.
Atheism isn't a club of choice, it is a condition. We cannot choose to be
atheist, anymore than we can choose to be theist. Not in reality anyway.

If I am writing about God, and glorifying God, then I am being theistic. If for
a brief moment I am distracted by an attractive female, and my thoughts turn to carnal desires, I am being atheistic.

The atheists buttons aren't pushed by religion, they are pushed by God, and people who believe in God. They don't mind religions that glorify man, the earth, the universe, the selfish self, or anything that goes against the notion of an almighty God, even if a religion claims to be serving God but clearly are hypocritical.

However, I do understand that you are talking about an ''atheist club'', where like minds will bond in a bid to strengthen the atheist feeling in a bid to crush what is left of real theism in the world today. Such is the time.


jan.
 
I always thought Jan was female. But Jan wrote:"If for
a brief moment I am distracted by an attractive female"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top